Parable of the Pine

Disclaimer: It is normally not a good idea to begin an essay with a disclaimer. But in this case it seems appropriate. The item in view here is probably a miniature Alberta Spruce, but that does not alliterate well with “parable.”  Since they both are evergreens the illustration will work with either species. Now to the story.

We have been cultivating a row of special shrubs between our front porch and the sidewalk for quite a while now. We are just about to add the black, weed-blocking fabric and finish up the landscaping with some decorative stones. ...until about a week ago. We spilled some dishwashing detergent on one of the green, cone-shaped shrubs and it turned brown where the liquid had “washed” it. (Photos included) Within a few days the entire shrub had dried up and the needles fell from it when it was gently brushed. All that remains is the “skeleton” of our Alberta spruce, or for our story, pine.

I was looking at it while ruminating on current events, and the term “systemic” came to mind. We hear of systemic racism pervading our society. Well, the “soap” that spilled on our parable pine was systemic. Nothing remains of the original. That made me think of an essay that I read elsewhere that defined “systemic.” Most “dictionary” definitions are essentially identical:

“relating to a system, especially as opposed to a particular part.”

That means that the entire body is completely suffused with the poison or malady. Ironically, the “systemic racism,” leading to suppression and oppression of certain sectors of society, supposedly suffusing police departments and even society, has been decried by members of that segment who are typically far more privileged and possessing benefits far beyond the average citizen of the country.

If the system is “systemically corrupt,” then how do some members of the class escape the effects? “Systemically racist” police forces are headed by Black leaders and often boast significant members of the “oppressed” class. Professional sports quite possibly have more Black  multimillionaires than those of other ethnic origins. 

Actually, “races,” is a misleading and misapplied term. We are all one race–the human race. We do not categorize horses by the color of their hair. We do call some, palominos, but they are still the same horse as a bay or a black or a roan. A horse is a horse is a horse. Human beings are all the same, just with some different levels of pigmentation, just like the horses. Genetically, we are all homo sapiens.

Now, like our parable pine, there are instances of mistreatment and discrimination, but those are localized, rather than systemic. A wide population may be infected or affected by “overspray” from some bad apples, but the entire system has not been compromised like our shrub was. The definition of systemic includes the whole shebang. All members of the oppressed class would have to suffer varying degrees of discrimination and oppression in order to classify the situation as systemic.

Is there a solution to the “localized” injuries that we have witnessed? Localities that have attempted to “Defund police” have experienced greater numbers of homicides and increases in crime in general. Sending a social worker to deal with an armed felon is not an effective countermeasure, in the estimation of most citizens.  If the whole of society is infected, then this systemic flaw does require complete replacement, like our shrub. We must analyze the current situation, or “status quo,” from my debate days.

To illustrate, consider another recent scenario. The multiple hurricanes and severe weather have eroded many seaside cliffs, and as the hillside erodes, a previously luxurious home that was built there begins to be in danger of collapsing into the ocean. We all recognize that doing an interior remodeling of the structure at this point would be both pointless and a complete waste of time.

The initial thrust in the project to preserve and protect the home would be to shore up the hillside and prevent further erosion. Working on the superstructure or roof would not solve the problem. Some solutions require a complete overhaul of the foundation structure and environment, but not a demolition of the whole edifice. Our society has for too long abandoned the logical, moral, legal, spiritual, and societal underpinnings provided by our history. We cannot just repaint the walls, or even demolish the structure and rebuild on the same plot of land. Even the radical elimination of systems will only produce similarly flawed replacements.

Legitimate grievances must be addressed. But to blow them out of all proportion and perspective is just as counterproductive as re-roofing our beach bungalow. Psalm 11:3 tells us, “If the foundations are destroyed, What can the righteous do?” Restoring righteousness and respect for the Creator who put all of these foundations here, are the first steps in correcting the course of our errant ship. (Excuse the shift of metaphors.)

The current situation not systemic. In other words, the “detergent” has not reached the roots and then wilted the whole plant. There is no total “falling off of needles.” Some precincts have Black chiefs or leaders, as previously mentioned. Untold black athletes lead their teams in action and even in remuneration. The undeniable problem that are protested are localized, not systemic.

The foundation of society has eroded. But all is not lost. There is still time to turn back, or in Biblical terms, repent, and return to our first, founding principles. “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed, by their Creator, with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness.”

First, all men are created equal. That was the fundamental understanding of the founders of the country. Irrespective of the three-fifths clause, all people were considered equal. The three-fifths clause was not a statement of worth or value, but was for the apportionment of representation in the House of Representatives. 

Some parties at the Constitutional Convention wanted to count slaves in the population for determining representation, despite the fact that slaves could not vote. The goal was to inflate and enhance the power of slave-holding states in Congress. The compromise was to reduce the impact of those states in the battle to eliminate slavery.

Second, rights are endowed by the Creator. Since that is true, we should turn back to Him, the One Who gave us rights in the first place.

And finally, racism is not ingrained. We are not born with it. Check two children playing together. They literally are color-blind. Color-blind, that is, until they are taught differently. But, children are not hard to teach to hate. We can rejoice in the fact that the love of the Lord can overcome both our ingrained and learned tendencies to evil. Turn back to God.

Just as we have to replant our parable palm, we need to replant our understanding and obedience to the Lord.

More on the Deity Of Jesus

The Bible is filled with references to the deity of Jesus. I ran across another one in my daily reading. Read Psalm 89:9 with me.

You rule the swelling of the sea; When its waves rise, You still them.

Does that sound familiar? Oh yes, it is in the New Testament, but, it seems that the Holy Spirit, in inspiring the Old Testament, wanted to lay a firm foundation (no pun intended) for this additional testimony as to Jesus being God. He used sea waves. Let’s explore the OT first.

Job 9 finds him lamenting his situation and responding to the Bildad’s “comforting words” that God rewards the good, so, by inference, Job must not be “good.” Job begins a long defense of, not himself, but God. Job 9 records it, but we will excerpt portions.

5 “It is God...8 And tramples down the waves of the sea....”

Psalm 107:29 continues our thought. That is even more explicitly mirrored in the NT.

He caused the storm to be still, So that the waves of the sea were hushed. 

Now let’s follow this thought into the Gospels.  Matthew 8:26, 27

He said to them, “Why are you afraid, you men of little faith?” Then He got up and rebuked the winds and the sea, and it became perfectly calm. 27 The men were amazed, and said, “What kind of a man is this, that even the winds and the sea obey Him?”

Matthew 14 gives us a second instance. This is the well-known time that Peter walked on the water. V. 32, 33

When they got into the boat, the wind stopped. 33 And those who were in the boat worshiped Him, saying, “You are certainly God’s Son!”

Mark 4:39, 40 repeats this.

And He got up and rebuked the wind and said to the sea, “Hush, be still.” And the wind died down and it became perfectly calm. 40 And He said to them, “Why are you afraid? Do you still have no faith?” 41 They became very much afraid and said to one another, “Who then is this, that even the wind and the sea obey Him?”

This is notable, because Peter, who was probably the source of Mark’s account, did not include the water-walking episode. I am convinced that it was omitted, not to save Peter the embarrassment of admitting his lack of faith, but to downplay his valor in the incident. He was the only one who stepped out of the boat. But I digress.

Luke 8:23-25 is the final version.

But as they were sailing along He fell asleep; and a fierce gale of wind descended on the lake, and they began to be swamped and to be in danger. 24 They came to Jesus and woke Him up, saying, “Master, Master, we are perishing!” And He got up and rebuked the wind and the surging waves, and they stopped, and it became calm. 25 And He said to them, “Where is your faith?” They were fearful and amazed, saying to one another, “Who then is this, that He commands even the winds and the water, and they obey Him?”

The answer to their query, “Who is this?” is very simple. Just glance back to the Old Testament. Clearly, the Holy Spirit was preparing the path for these guys to “get it.” Jesus, in their presence, performed acts that only God, Himself, could do.

The answer, is, that He is God. A casual reading of the Old Testament, Psalms in this instance, just leaps out of the page calling out, “Who did this?” Or, “Who could do this?” Our quick search removes all doubt as to the identity of the One Who literally did this.

The Old Testament writers were speaking theoretically. They had not seen this happen. It reminds me of chemistry class. I would give the students the concept, then we would conduct an experiment to observe it in action. God, in principle, can do these things. But the disciples literally went into the lab and did the “experiment.”

The Lord graciously opened the book of proofs, the answer book for educators in our group, for us to know beyond doubt that Jesus Christ is Lord–God. Glory, what a Savior.

Plea

As I was thinking about a lesson on the Lord’s prayer, I was in the process of preparing our newly planted landscaping patch in front of our porch. I even lay awake at night “dreaming” or something, about hoeing all of the pesky little green intruders that pop up after every rain. We are going to put down the black fabric that supposedly blocks weeks, but I am taking no chances. I am going to excise as many of those pesky interlopers as possible before we make the final installation. Then we will lay a smooth bed of stones on top of that to finish the look of our shrub line. We do not want any unplanted or unplanned vegetation protruding from our rocky plot.

Previously, I had cut out the rotted bases of the six “decorative” posts that seem to hold up the roof over the porch. I replaced those with solid, treated lumber so the whole affair is stronger, sturdier, and longer lasting than the original was when the house was new. We are fixing this place up with new shingles on the roof and new BLACK gutters. They look sharp.

As I was contemplating what I have left to do, a thought flashed into my mind. “Are you fastidious in preparing for eternity and warning others as in preparing a landscaping plot or avoiding COVID-19?” We know people who do not meet anyone and very rarely venture out of their own house and yard. We hopefully, all wear masks when out and assiduously wash our hands or disinfect them at every station in the stores that we enter and leave. And we wash for 20 seconds, just long enough to pray the Lord’s prayer, when we get home.

What about it? Are your preparations for what comes next as choreographed and determined as what you use for “daily chores” or other activities? The consequences of poor preparation will be some nuisance weeds interspersed with the shrubs. Careless or negligent hygiene may expose us to this virus, which, in some instances may even be fatal.

But failing to properly prepare for what comes after death has eternal, everlasting consequences. We join Paul in 2 Corinthians 5:20

Therefore, we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God were making an appeal through us; we beg you on behalf of Christ, be reconciled to God.

Paul is begging you, on behalf of Jesus Himself, to turn to God. Turn before it is too late. We beg you as well. There is nothing on earth that will compensate for missing this invitation. Nothing.

And, just for good measure, turn this around and pass it on to any and everyone you know. This is not just weeds in a garden. It is not just life and death. It is eternal separation from the Lord Who loved you and gave His life for you on the cross.

Romans 5 says that death came to all men (and women) because of Adam’s sin, which we all have copied. Adam died, physically, but he accepted the sacrifice that was made to cover his nakedness. That was a literal picture of the spiritual transaction that took place and culminated on Calvary. Jesus died as a substitute for Adam, and Eve. And He died for you and me. The sin debt was satisfied by the death of the Perfect Substitute, not an innocent lamb as in the Garden, but of the Innocent Lamb on Calvary.

Beg is not a strong enough word. When people came to Jesus to ask Him to heal their children they often sprawled on the ground in front of Him, grasping his feet. They did not need to portray such anguished pleading. His heart was ready to answer even before they asked.

Just as we ask for “bread” for the day, we need the living bread that Jesus talked about in John 6. We have to ask for it to have life. To have eternal life. Please ask today. We beg you. If I could grab your feet and hold on until you asked, I would. But that is not how Jesus works.

You have a free will, to choose. Choose Jesus. Choose Him today. There is nothing more important and no other option. We beg you on behalf of Christ, be reconciled to God.

Rapture in Romans 11?

As I was reading Romans 11 a verse and concept jumped out at me. Let’s look at what Paul said. Romans 11:16-24

If the first piece of dough is holy, the lump is also; and if the root is holy, the branches are too. 17 But if some of the branches were broken off, and you, being a wild olive, were grafted in among them and became partaker with them of the rich root of the olive tree, 18 do not be arrogant toward the branches; but if you are arrogant, remember that it is not you who supports the root, but the root supports you.  You will say then, “Branches were broken off so that I might be grafted in.” 20 Quite right, they were broken off for their unbelief, but you stand by your faith. Do not be conceited, but fear; 21 for if God did not spare the natural branches, He will not spare you, either. 22 Behold then the kindness and severity of God; to those who fell, severity, but to you, God’s kindness, if you continue in His kindness; otherwise you also will be cut off. 23 And they also, if they do not continue in their unbelief, will be grafted in, for God is able to graft them in again. 24 For if you were cut off from what is by nature a wild olive tree, and were grafted contrary to nature into a cultivated olive tree, how much more will these who are the natural branches be grafted into their own olive tree? 25 For I do not want you, brethren, to be uninformed of this mystery—so that you will not be wise in your own estimation—that a partial hardening has happened to Israel until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in; 26 and so all Israel will be saved; just as it is written, “The Deliverer will come from Zion, He will remove ungodliness from Jacob.” 27 “This is My covenant with them, When I take away their sins.”

This is in the context of explaining the fact that the Jews had not been faithful to their promises and commitments. They had not followed the Lord, and consequently, God had stopped working with them. Paul, in chapter 9 mourned this and prayed fervently for the Jews to get back into relationship with the Lord, their God. He went on to explain that Israel had been set aside and God is now working with the Church to “preach the Gospel to all the world.” (Mark 16:15)

Our context for this consideration is Daniel 9:24-27. Let’s check that.

“Seventy weeks have been decreed for your people and your holy city, to finish the transgression, to make an end of sin, to make atonement for iniquity, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal up vision and prophecy and to anoint the most holy place. 25 So you are to know and discern that from the issuing of a decree to restore and rebuild Jerusalem until Messiah the Prince there will be seven weeks and sixty-two weeks; it will be built again, with plaza and moat, even in times of distress. 26 Then after the sixty-two weeks the Messiah will be cut off and have nothing, and the people of the prince who is to come will destroy the city and the sanctuary. And its end will come with a flood; even to the end there will be war; desolations are determined. 27 And he will make a firm covenant with the many for one week, but in the middle of the week he will put a stop to sacrifice and grain offering; and on the wing of abominations will come one who makes desolate, even until a complete destruction, one that is decreed, is poured out on the one who makes desolate.”

Daniel had read the fact that the Nation of Israel would be captive in Babylon for 70 years in Jeremiah  25:11, 12 and Jeremiah 29:10. So his prayer was, “What next?” The passage in Daniel is God’s answer to Daniel. There will be 490 years in Israel’s history. The first 483 years led up to the Messiah, when He would be cut off. We read about that in the Gospels when Jesus was rejected as Messiah on Palm Sunday then crucified later that week. (Roughly AD 29-33)

Following that event, Jerusalem would be destroyed. This happened in AD 70. The rest of the verse tells about a “prince who is to come,” who would make a peace treaty with Israel to ensure peace for seven years. This marks the beginning of the final seven years of God’s plan for Israel which will culminate in the Jews returning to the Lord. Paul seized on that prospect. Israel would be saved and returned to the place of honor in God’s plan for the world.

And this final seven-year period would be the catalyst for this transformation and repentance. In the meantime, God established the church, beginning in Acts 2 and gave them the commission of sharing the Good News of salvation to the entire world–including the Jews. This we recognize as the church age. This was the “wild olive branch” being grafted into the tree.

We know from fulfilled prophecy, that what God said in the past has come true. So what has not yet been completed just requires a “bit of time” until that is completed. The Romans passage confirms that.

But that leaves one question for us to answer. Where is the Church and what part does it play in this final restoration? The final seven years is named, descriptively as the Tribulation. It is going to be a terrible time. Revelation 5 through 19 gives a vivid account of this time of destruction, leading up to the Battle of Armageddon and the Return of the Lord Jesus. But what part of this does the Chruch play?

Paul tells us of the Rapture, the catching away of believers at some time in the future. (1Corinthians15:50-56; and 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18) But the exact timing of that event is not delineated for us–here. But it seems that there are some specifics given. First turn to 2 Thessalonians 2:3-12 where Paul explains one detail of the “Day of the Lord.”

Let no one in any way deceive you, for it (Day of the Lord) will not come unless the apostasy comes first, and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction, 4 who opposes and exalts himself above every so-called god or object of worship, so that he takes his seat in the temple of God, displaying himself as being God. 5 Do you not remember that while I was still with you, I was telling you these things? 6 And you know what restrains him now, so that in his time he will be revealed. 7 For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work; only he who now restrains will do so until he is taken out of the way. 8 Then that lawless one will be revealed whom the Lord will slay with the breath of His mouth and bring to an end by the appearance of His coming; 9 that is, the one whose coming is in accord with the activity of Satan, with all power and signs and false wonders, 10 and with all the deception of wickedness for those who perish, because they did not receive the love of the truth so as to be saved. 11 For this reason God will send upon them a deluding influence so that they will believe what is false, 12 in order that they all may be judged who did not believe the truth, but took pleasure in wickedness.

This “man of lawlessness” is the “prince to come” in Daniel 9. Daniel called his actions an “abomination.” Here Paul tells us that this guy, we call him the anti-Christ, will try to take the place of God. (Just by way of review, that happened way back there when Lucifer tried to exalt his throne above God. And Adam and Eve were encouraged to become God. And on, and on, and on. The trail will stop here.)

So this seems to indicate that the anti-Christ will not be revealed until “what restrains him” is removed from the earth. And what can restrain Satan and his work? That is the Holy Spirit. So this anti-Christ cannot appear until the Holy Spirit stops restraining him. And notice how the restraint will terminate. The One Who restrains will be taken out of the way.

What could that mean? Follow this logic carefully. The Church did not appear until the Messiah was cut off. And when Paul was talking about this in the life of the Jewish nation, he said that the branch was “broken off.” A new and different branch was grafted into the tree in its place. This is where the Church began the job that Israel had failed. That was the job of sharing the news of God’s redemption for all men. Paul’s other writings make clear the co-partnership of the Gentiles and the Jews in the Church. Galatians 3:28 says that the Jews and Gentiles are one in Christ, or the Church.

The influence of the Holy Spirit, living within individual members of the Church is definitely restraining the lawless one. It appears that Paul’s argument is that the indwelling Holy Spirit is the active agent involved in restraining the anti-Christ and his activity.

And for the Holy Spirit to be removed from the world, the individual believers in whom He dwells must leave also. Hence, the Pretribulation Rapture seems to emerge as the accurate interpretation. Now turn our attention to the Romans passage.

The branch was broken off, and a wild olive branch was grafted into the tree in its place. Focus specifically on v. 24.

...how much more will these who are the natural branches be grafted into their own olive tree? 

Couple this with the seventy weeks of Daniel and we inevitably arrive at the conclusion that God’s plan was specific for Israel, 483 years. Then the Church for about 2000 years, and counting, follows. But the culmination God is seeking is specifically directed towards Israel. Daniel 9:24 specifically ties the “results” of the 490 years to Israel.

“Seventy weeks have been decreed for your people and your holy city, to finish the transgression, to make an end of sin, to make atonement for iniquity, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal up vision and prophecy and to anoint the most holy place."

First, the focus is on “your people.” Clearly, Daniel was a Jew. Your holy city, is Jerusalem. So the purpose of the full 490 year program is to effect some result in the nation of Israel. The specifics are listed.

1. To finish the transgression. The rejection of Christ as Messiah was merely the culmination of Jewish refusal to accept God’s plans.

2. “To make an end of sin,” will occur at the final judgment. Interestingly enough, Jesus seems to have identified a dual judgment. One that focuses on nations and a second one that deals with individuals. The second one is the Great White Throne judgment of Revelation 20. The Matthew 25 judgment is specifically for nations.

32 All the nations will be gathered before Him; and He will separate them from one another, as the shepherd separates the sheep from the goats; 33 and He will put the sheep on His right, and the goats on the left.

The sheep receive their reward. V. 34

34 “Then the King will say to those on His right, ‘Come, you who are blessed of My Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world.”

And the goats, likewise are judged. V. 41a

41 “Then He will also say to those on His left, ‘Depart from Me, accursed ones, into the eternal fire which has been prepared for the devil and his angels....” 

So the sin of Israel is ended. They, as a nation, will follow their God. This prophecy is clearly directed toward Israel. Couple that with Romans 11: 26, 27.

...and so all Israel will be saved; just as it is written, “The Deliverer will come from Zion, He will remove ungodliness from Jacob.” 27 “This is My covenant with them, When I take away their sins.”

Did you notice the emphasis? All Israel will be saved and their sins are removed. Sounds just like Daniel, doesn’t it. And the conclusion of our thoughts is back in Romans. If Israel was “cut off” to allow the Gentiles and the Church to fulfill God’s redemptive plans, then is it logical that the Church will be “cut off” or taken out to make way for God’s plans for Israel? For them to be “grafted back into the tree?”

And the logical question is, “Where will the ‘native branch’ be grafted back into the tree?” Removing the Church by way of the Rapture makes all of this fit like a hand in a glove to all of the prophecies. And coupling that with the scenario in Revelation 7 where the 144,000 Jews are sealed and sent into the world to preach, we have a seamless transition from the Church age to the incipient Kingdom, later identified as the Millennium in chapter 20 of Revelation.

Removing the church heightens the prospect that the world will listen to the 144,000 Jews as they fan out throughout the world with the message that “Jesus has taken His own out of the world and will be back in seven years.” (Seven years minus the time since the treaty actuated by the anti-Christ, that is.)

And Jesus’ comment that no one knows the day or the hour that He will return must refer to the Rapture, as Daniel’s clock, which was literally fulfilled to the day for the “cutting off of Messiah,” will pinpoint when that Messiah will come back on His white horse in Revelation 19. It will be seven years after the treaty is effectuated.

So in this somewhat roundabout trail, we seem to have discovered a pre-Tribulation Rapture in Romans. We ought not be surprised as the Scripture is completely consistent and uniform throughout. We can trust its accuracy from Genesis to Revelation. If we find “contradictions” or lack of clarity, we can be assured that these “problems” lie in our interpretation and understanding and not with the corpus of Scripture.

We cry out with David, “Lord, I love Thy law.” (Psalm 119:97 and 113) And with John, “Even so, come Lord Jesus.” (Revelation 22:20)

Smarter Than God?

Have you heard the phrase, “Richer than God?” I have heard some people described, erroneously, in those terms. Anyone who says that is merely displaying their ignorance. In that same line, sometimes we think we are smarter than God. (Hands up, Jim.)

There is an exchange in John 10 that, at one time, drove me crazy. Jesus had a great opportunity to proclaim, once and for all, that He was God. (Spoiler alert. Wake up, Jimbo. You missed it.)

Let’s look at the passage and spike a few cannons. By way of background, Jesus has just healed the man born blind. Some believed that He must be the Messiah while others argued that since He did it on the Sabbath, He could not be from God. The controversy continued on in the celebration of the feast of Dedication. The Jews specifically demanded that He tell them whether He was the Messiah or not. John 10:24-30

The Jews then gathered around Him, and were saying to Him, “How long will You keep us in suspense? If You are the Christ, tell us plainly.” 25 Jesus answered them, “I told you, and you do not believe; the works that I do in My Father’s name, these testify of Me. 26 But you do not believe because you are not of My sheep. 27 My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me; 28 and I give eternal life to them, and they will never perish; and no one will snatch them out of My hand. 29 My Father, who has given them to Me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father’s hand. 30 I and the Father are one.”

This is pretty self-explanatory. “I told you that I am the Messiah and you will not believe. Check out My “works.” (This is a clear appeal to the Old Testament that prophesied that the Messiah would make the lame walk, the blind see, and the deaf hear. (Isaiah 35:5, 6) The “Worker” of those things is here. They could see with their own eyes these miracles. Pardon the contextual pun.

We will skip the little segue into His sheep. Not because it is not important, but because it does not apply to our thought. His sheep are as secure as if they were in the Father’s hand: Because they are. But I digress.

Then Jesus dropped the bombshell. (An anachronism if there ever was one.) “I and the Father are one.” He did not mean “one in purpose,” as some cults have tried to reinterpret this. He meant that He, Jesus, and the Father were literally the same Being. Later on (John 14:9) He explained to Phillip that “He who has seen Me has seen the Father.” And we can be assured that the Jews understood this explicitly. They took up stones to execute Him.

They would not do this if Jesus had said that He was merely trying to accomplish the work of God, as did Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and all of the prophets. He could have included John the Baptist in the list as well. No one was stoned because he claimed to extend or repeat the work of anyone on this list.

Jesus challenged their impending attack immediately. (V. 31, 32)

The Jews picked up stones again to stone Him. 32 Jesus answered them, “I showed you many good works from the Father; for which of them are you stoning Me?” 

Their answer is clear, concise, and conclusive. (V. 33)

The Jews answered Him, “For a good work we do not stone You, but for blasphemy; and because You, being a man, make Yourself out to be God.” 

And here is where I thought that I was smarter than God-Jesus. I wished that Jesus had merely said, “Yes, I am God. And your stones will bounce off, proving My point and shutting your mouths permanently–along with those of many subsequent cults to follow.” But He didn’t. (34-36)

Jesus answered them, “Has it not been written in your Law, ‘I said, you are gods’? 35 If he called them gods, to whom the word of God came (and the Scripture cannot be broken), 36 do you say of Him, whom the Father sanctified and sent into the world, ‘You are blaspheming,’ because I said, ‘I am the Son of God’? 

“No!” I screamed. That is exactly the wrong answer. Now You have empowered all the “little ‘g’ cults” when they claim that You merely equated Yourself with those who heard God’s Word in the past.

“Granted,” their argument goes, “Jesus is probably a level or two above those prophets, but He is not on the same level as God.”

And if we stop reading at this point, the point is won by the negative. “Jesus is not THE God. Big ‘G’ God.” He is merely an elevated being, like a super-angel or something.

But Jesus did not stop there, and John recorded it for us. J and J were definitely smarter than Jim.

37 If I do not do the works of My Father, do not believe Me; 38 but if I do them, though you do not believe Me, believe the works, so that you may know and understand that the Father is in Me, and I in the Father.” 39 Therefore they were seeking again to seize Him, and He eluded their grasp.

Jesus could have corrected their incorrect perception of Him if that had been the error. “No, guys, I am not The God. Back off.”

Instead, He twisted the knife even deeper. The works testify to the fact that Jesus was, in His words, “in the Father, and the Father was in Him.” This was clearly not a denial of equality with God, as evidenced by the reaction of His opponents. They continued their quest to execute Him for blasphemy, for claiming to be God. But they failed–again.

But what about that verse? Let’s look at it. Ps 82:2-6

How long will you judge unjustly And show partiality to the wicked? Selah. 3 Vindicate the weak and fatherless; Do justice to the afflicted and destitute. 4 Rescue the weak and needy; Deliver them out of the hand of the wicked. 5 They do not know nor do they understand; They walk about in darkness; All the foundations of the earth are shaken.

The LORD is addressing the leaders of Israel, that is the priests and leaders. (No Scribes and Pharisees, yet.) And look at their works. If the Jews recognized this passage, they knew that Jesus was parroting and redirecting the charges against the ancient leaders. The Psalmist, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit continued quoting the Lord.

6 I said, “You are gods, And all of you are sons of the Most High.

Now Jesus’ intent is clear. God called those leaders, “gods” and they certainly earned the scorn. Conversely, Jesus did redemptive miracles, releasing people from plagues. And He was literally fulfilling the prophecies for when the Messiah would walk on earth. Messiah equals God. And the leaders knew that. Look at their response. V. 39 tells us that they were doubly convinced that He was blaspheming.

And what about my brilliant analysis of Jesus’ “mistake?” Well, had He not used that verse, some current cult could have seized on it to “downgrade” His claim. He was aligned with Jehovah as were the leaders in Psalm 82, they could claim. Jesus would also have been relegated to the “little g” designation as merely one who heard from Jehovah and carried out His designs.

By usurping that argument, and letting the Jewish leaders verify it’s failure to “corral Him” in the little g remuda, this argument was effectively countered. Cannon spiked, to utilize a nice anachronism, the second or third one of the day. But that was not the complete purpose. Read on in John.

40 And He went away again beyond the Jordan to the place where John was first baptizing, and He was staying there. 41 Many came to Him and were saying, “While John performed no sign, yet everything John said about this man was true.” 42 Many believed in Him there.

Remember those “works” that Jesus cited? They were the calling card (anachronism number four) of the Messiah. John (the Baptist) did not do miracles. He was not the Messiah. But This ONE did! John had pointed to Jesus as the Lamb of God and many understood that this was also the Messiah. And the results? V. 42, “Many believed in Him there.”

Message received and acted upon. They accepted Him as the, their, Messiah. The “nattering nabobs of negativism” (not sure what that is) had failed to dissuade a large number of listeners. (Many believed.)

Was Jesus’ line of argumentation a mistake? Me genoito (Paul’s favorite negation. Absolutely, positively, not! May it never be.) And Jimmy boy is glad to admit the error of trying to correct Him. Jesus did not make a mistake. He perfectly responded to the question at hand, and deftly deflected any future ones that may arise.

We just have to blurt Romans 11:33-35.

Oh, the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are His judgments and unfathomable His ways!  (And arguments: Editor) 34 For who has known the mind of the Lord, or who became His counselor? 35 Or who has first given to Him that it might be paid back to him again? 36 For from Him and through Him and to Him are all things. To Him be the glory forever.

Who has taught Him something or anything? Who has added to or aided His arguments? Who is smarter than He? We all, with Paul, repeat the implied, “Nobody!”

And I am so glad that is true. Glory.

Mean to Cults?

Am I mean to cults or false believers? Let’s rephrase the question. If you see someone heading for a bridge that has been washed out and you warn them about the danger, are you being mean to them? It would appear that rather than assessing the actions as “mean” or cruel, they would be considered kind and compassionate.

Likewise, when I encounter someone who has incorrect beliefs, I try to lovingly point them to the truth. Here is an example. It is repeated in all three Synoptic Gospels. In  Mark 10:17 Jesus is approached by the Rich Young Ruler. (It is repeated in Matthew 19:16 and Luke 18:18.)

As He was setting out on a journey, a man ran up to Him and knelt before Him, and asked Him, “Good Teacher, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?”

I like to follow the example of a good teacher. Here we have the Good Teacher. There are two points to the question and three to the answer. First, the RYL called Jesus, “Good.” Here is Jesus’ reply. V. 18

And Jesus said to him, “Why do you call Me good? No one is good except God alone. 

Jesus’ first response was to answer the underlying assumption of the question. Was Jesus denying that He was good? On the contrary, He was reaffirming what His questioner had stated. In their understanding, only God was good. Therefore the ruler was affirming that Jesus was God. Instead of contradicting him, Jesus continued to answer the second part of the question. “How can I ‘inherit eternal life’ or be saved?” He gave the answer that God would give. V. 19

“You know the commandments, ‘Do not murder, Do not commit adultery, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Do not defraud, Honor your father and mother.’” 

Jesus then referenced the Ten Commandments. The response from RYL gave Jesus the opportunity to answer the real question by confronting false beliefs. V. 20

And he said to Him, “Teacher, I have kept all these things from my youth up.” 

And here we find the heart of the Master Teacher. V. 21 begins with, “Looking at him, Jesus felt a love for him....” This is the heart that I want to have for false beliefs. What was wrong with what the man said? Check the response again. Jesus’ love, or compassion, as some versions translate it was for the person and because his beliefs were sincerely wrong.

He claimed to have “kept the commandments from his youth up.” Think of that! He was far superior to all of the Jews from Moses’ day on the present. No one had kept the commandments. Before Moses had brought the two tablets down from the mountain, the people had broken every one of them. (Exodus 32) Moses threw the tablets to the ground, shattering them, in a display of the fact that they had “broken the Law.”

Since no one could keep them, God had given Moses the instructions for building the Tabernacle, the Tent of Meeting, where people could come to make atonement and receive forgiveness. (Exodus 20-31) In our story today, Jesus needed to shatter the confidence, false confidence really, of his petitioner. V. 21 This is the third point of His answer.

...and said to him, “One thing you lack: go and sell all you possess and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow Me.” 22 But at these words he was saddened, and he went away grieving, for he was one who owned much property.

Jesus was not trying to hurt the RYL. But as long as His visitor believed that he was okay, Jesus could not help him. Aside from hypochondriacs, no one takes medicine until they are sick. And at times we need a doctor to tell us that we are sick and need to take some medicine. “Doctor” Jesus had diagnosed our friend’s problem. It was the same as the Pharisee in Jesus’ story in Luke 18:9-14. The Pharisee was bragging about how good he was, rather than seeing his extreme need. Jesus did not get to “heal” him. The Publican recognized his need and asked for “medicine.”

And, like someone who receives medicine for a disease and refuses to take it, the RYL chose to remain “ill” instead of getting well. This is tragic, yet, Jesus did not interfere with the choice. He watched the man grieve, not for his sins, but, having put his possessions above God, he had a god that could not save. That was the first Commandment, broken as surely as the tablets in Exodus. Sadly, he was unwilling to change his allegiance. We grieve with Jesus.

This story has some critical applications. First, Jesus established His authority to answer the question, “How can I be saved?” He was God and His answer was literally, “The Word from God.” When a cult member or other unbeliever approaches us, they are looking for a Word from God. If I give my “word” that is worthless. But if I convey God’s Word, they will know the Truth. Whether they accept it or not, is their decision.

Think about it. Why would a cult member join the group? They want to be saved. So when they come to me, I can either leave them in their error or point them to the truth. (I do not seek them out to interdict their lives. The Rich Young Ruler came to Jesus. When people approach me, I feel justified, and in fact, compelled to answer their “question.”)

Now a little psychology. When people with false beliefs cross our paths, we must recognize that they often are personally committed to this position or concept. There is an erroneous belief involved, and logical presentation of the truth should counter it. But the commitment is not logical and reasonable. The person has personally identified with this. There is an emotional involvement and it has become who they are.

Contradicting that misconception is perceived as a personal attack on not just their beliefs, but on themselves, on who they are. That is why Jesus was so gentle. He did not say, “You are wrong! You are a sinner! You haven’t kept the commandments, No one, you included, can or has kept them.” Instead, he gently pointed to the first one that had been violated. The litigant was “sorrowful,” because he would not be able to give up his “other” god.

I had a Jehovah’s Witness member visit me several times in his attempt to “convert” me. I pointed him to the error of his rejection of Jesus as God. He relied on his faulty translation of John 1:1 that described Jesus as “a god.” (Little G, and not equal with God the Father.) We had several rounds of discussion, yet neither seemed to prevail.

On our last visit, I turned him to his own “translation,” and I use the word loosely, where, in Hebrews 1, God the Father called Jesus, the Son, God. (Hebrews 1:8) This was not my NASB or any other translation. It was his own book. He refused to believe it. I asked him what did it mean if not what it said.

He averred that even though it “said” that, that was not what it meant. So I asked what it meant. “Not that,” was his reply. He adamantly refused to answer what it meant. The logic, reason, and literal words did not dissuade him.

He had told me that he had been a JW since 1974, which, at the time, was 35 years or so. He could not and would not change. I prayed for him and still do, when I think of him. Jesus could get through to Saul of Tarsus, and He is still in the “convincing” business.

Jesus had love for the seeker when He was here on earth. He still does, and when Jesus sends a seeker to us, we first love them, then gently turn them to the Truth, which ultimately, is Jesus.

Am I mean or cruel to confront cults and other false beliefs? Or am I following my Leader, in showing compassion and pointing to the Truth? I will continue until He stops me.

Deity of Jesus Revisited

We have examined this question several times in the past, but it does not hurt to brush up on the basics occasionally. Vince Lombardi, the coach of the world champion Green Bay Packers, is said to have begun some of his team meetings by holding up an object.”This, Gentlemen, is a football.”

And Coach Lombardi seemed to realize some modicum of success with his approach to fundamental principles. We must never be oblivious to challenges to the deity of Christ. They sneak up on us in various ways and if we are not, as Peter said, “...ready always to give a defense for the glorious hope within us,” we will either be overwhelmed argumentatively, or miss an opportunity to correct error when it is presented. (1 Peter 3:15) And while we are at it, check out
2 Peter 1:12.

Therefore, I will always be ready to remind you of these things, even though you already know them, and have been established in the truth which is present with you.

Peter seems to have been of the “Lombardi school” of instruction. (Or maybe Lombardi followed Peter.) You already know this, but it does not hurt to repeat it.

The first time I encountered the argument that Jesus was not God was when on a high school evaluation trip in eastern Illinois. I, and the guy rooming with me, were there to evaluate the various departments of the high school in their quest to satisfy certification requirements.

It seems like the first night we roomed together, we shared our various teaching duties. I told him that I was the chemistry teacher and the debate coach. “Did you ever debate a philosophical question, like, ‘Was Jesus really God?’” he asked.

“No,” I replied, “we only debate policy issues, and besides, debate always has two somewhat tenable propositions. Otherwise, it is not fair for the team that draws the ‘losing’ issue.”

“Oh, there are many who do not believe that Jesus was really God,” he rejoined.

I explained that this was really just taking an oddball cult and giving it credence. To which he replied that it was not all that much out of the mainstream. Oops, I had unwittingly stepped on some toes there. “Do you question that?” I asked.

“Why do you believe that he was God?” he countered. (Capitalization applied as he intended.)

“Well, John 1:1 tells us that,” I replied, falling neatly into his trap. “In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God.” End of discussion, I thought.

“Did you know that in my translation, the New World Translation, it says that the Word was “a god?”

“Nope,” I responded. “That must be an error.”

His answer surprised me. “Have you ever read it in the original Greek?” The trap was sprung. “I just happen to have a Greek New Testament here. Let’s check it out.” (Actually, it wasn’t “Greek” it was an English transliteration, but the point was lost on me. No difference, anyway.)

We turned to John and there, in verse 1 were “two different” words for “God.” Well, my mouth was shut. I had no answer. And then trap number two was set. “The Council of Nicea, in AD 325, invented (his word) the doctrine of the Trinity. Before that, no one really believed it.” Snap!

I backpedaled and stalled. I got his address and, promising to write, began a year-long correspondence on this issue. First, I had to resolve the questions, should I say “doubts,” that he planted. Then, as I discovered the paucity of reason and truth in his arguments, and pointed them out, he rolled out one after another.

How would you have fared there? Want some help? Well, you know that we are going to do that. Why else would we have come this far?

Point one: I went to Dr. Dunn, our Pastor in Peoria and showed him the Greek conundrum. I did not have a Greek New Testament, and still do not, but rightly surmised that he did and he gladly pulled it out. “See, right there, two words for “God” are there.” Theos and theon. Dr. Dunn burst out in a chortle that was half amusement, half consternation, and half ridicule. (Yes, I know that doesn’t add up. Neither does the argument.)

“That is what happens when you try to read a language that you do not know,” he answered. “You know that there are cases in English for pronouns. ‘He’ and ‘him’ are the same word, the same person, but different cases, subjective and objective. Greek has cases for nouns. Theos is the subjective case, Theon is objective. They mean the same Person, God.”

So the New World “Translation” is a bad translation. In fact, a little research revealed that the crew that “translated” it had one guy who had taken one semester of college Greek and the rest were, at best, self-taught. Essentially, it was a copy of an English edition with the references to Jesus’ deity excised or revised. We will come back to this a little later.

Point two: I do not remember if I asked Dr. Dunn about the Council of Nicea, but a very simple bit of research (an interesting project back then, before Al Gore had invented the internet, but I digress) research revealed that this particular Council was called for the explicit purpose of CONDEMNING the heresy that Jesus was not God. It did affirm that He was God, but only because the body of Biblical truth and writing from M, M, L, and J on had declared it. The majority of the church accepted that doctrine and a small, but influential offshoot, had caused the controversy.

So my friend, Lincoln was his name, had totally reversed the purpose and declaration of the Nicean Council and bamboozled me. I should have stopped writing to him with that letter. As it turned out, every rebuttal I sent him was met with a new claim of Biblical error on the part of deists. This continued for a whole year or more. Finally, his response was to raise the Council of Nicea–again.

About that time, I noticed an article on cults in Moody Monthly. It listed several different cults and their leaders, and one, under the basic aegis of Jehovah’s Witnesses, but a deviation, was some named group, originated and led by a certain Lincoln. Now I knew why he was unconvinced by my arguments. This was his baby.

David Jeremiah was talking about doubt the other day and used some terms that apply here. There are “honest doubters” who are asking questions and are amenable to proof. Then there are dishonest doubters who have a set position and are merely arguing with no intention of learning the truth, or changing their position.

Dr. Jeremiah gave an example of a man who was convinced that he was dead. His psychiatrist tried to help him back to reality. “Do dead men bleed?”

“No,” was the answer. Then he was instructed to walk around for a week repeating that, “Dead men do not bleed.” When he came back a week later the doctor asked him again.

“Do dead men bleed?”

“No,” was the response. Then the doctor took a pin and pricked the finger of his patient. A drop of blood pooled on his finger. “Well, what do you know! Dead men do bleed!”

Dishonest doubt cannot be persuaded. I should have saved my postage. Fortunately, it was much less than it is now, so I guess we can chalk it up to being a witness, being ready to answer.

And, just for reference, a few verses that show the deity of Jesus are found in Revelation (21:6; 22:13) where He is called the first and the last, the beginning and the end, the alpha and the omega. Isaiah 41:4 and 44:6 repeat that. The Old Testament “Jehovah” or better, Yahweh is the same as the New Testament Jesus.

And the New World “T” did not find all of the references to Jesus being God. I had a guy who came back to my porch several times and I asked him if he had a Bible. Of course, he did and trotted out his NWT. We turned to Hebrews 1, and even in that poor translation, I found what I wanted. (I will quote NASB, but it is in their version–at least until someone finds it and removes it.) I began with verse 6

And when He again brings the firstborn into the world, He says, “And let all the angels of God worship Him.”

The “He” is God the Father. And He commanded the angels to “worship” the Son. But the OT specifically says that there is only One God, check the Isaiah references, and the commandments forbid worshiping any other god. So if NWT is right in John 1, then the Father, Jehovah, just contravened His own word. But I didn’t stop there.

Slide your finger down to verse 8: (“He” is again God, the Father)

But of the Son He says, “Your throne, O God, is forever and ever,

God the Father called the Son, “O God!” And, I have to sadly report that the visitor was a dishonest doubter. He denied that it meant what it said. He refused. He could not provide a different meaning, and he left. He has not returned.

A couple more quick notes. I will not comment on these, except to confirm that LORD in the Old Testament is Yahweh, or Jehovah. You can figure them out.

Isaiah 40:3 The voice of him that crieth in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make straight in the desert a highway for our God.

Malachi 3:1 Behold, I will send my messenger, and he shall prepare the way before me: and the Lord, whom ye seek, shall suddenly come to his temple, even the messenger of the covenant, whom ye delight in: behold, he shall come, saith the Lord of hosts.

Matthew 3:3 For this is he that was spoken of by the prophet Isaiah, saying, The voice of one crying in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make his paths straight.

Mark 1:3 The voice of one crying in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make his paths straight.

Luke 1:76 And thou, child, shalt be called the prophet of the Highest: for thou shalt go before the face of the Lord to prepare his ways; (John the Baptist)

Luke 3:4 As it is written in the book of the words of Isaiah the prophet, saying, The voice of one crying in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make his paths straight.

And for my last magic trick turn to Luke 19:44. Some translations render this as “time of your visitation.” Others, like CSB say:

They will crush you and your children among you to the ground, and they will not leave one stone on another in your midst, because you did not recognize the time when God visited you.”

Who visited them? Zechariah 9:9 spells it out, as:

Rejoice greatly, Daughter Zion! Shout in triumph, Daughter Jerusalem! Look, your King is coming to you; he is righteous and victorious, humble and riding on a donkey, on a colt, the foal of a donkey.

Jesus was the One Who visited them. This is confirmed in all four Gospels. (Matthew 21, Mark 11, Luke 19, John 12) God, in the flesh, appeared and presented Himself as God, King, and Messiah. They refused, and rejected Him. But that is for another day. Pardon the pun.

For our purpose today, Jesus was and is God. His deity was accepted and taught by His disciples, their followers, and true believers ever since. My friend Lincoln notwithstanding, that question is not a viable debate topic.

Vince would be pleased that we know what a “football” is.

Jesus is Lord: The LORD. Amen.